UCLA debacle 1 of 5: I’m disgusted
(Written by kencraw)
I think I’ve slowly grown the reputation of being the optimistic Cal blogger: always hopeful, always pointing out the upside or the potentials, willing to cut the Bears some slack on their weaker days… and I’ll probably continue to do that, in fact I’ve set that aside as my last post of the day. But there are occasionally games that just disgust me and yesterday was one of them.
There is no excuse for the Bears losing to UCLA. To those who have said they have a newfound respect for UCLA, particularly their defense, one of two things is true. Either you had way too little respect for them or you don’t realize just how poor the Bears play-calling was. If I had to come up with a word for the Bears play-calling in the weak moments of the last two years it would be stubborn. Many pick the word conservative, but I think that is wholly inaccurate.
Conservative is a combination of doing what you do best and taking what the opposition gives you. It’s grinding things out and continuing to do what works, albeit just barely well enough to win, until a slim victory is assured. Notice that in my definition of conservative, there is no explicit reference to the run game. See, in my opinion, it’s not conservative to run the ball against a defense that is loading the box with NINE defenders. I’m not exaggerating. When Cal had a 2 WR set, UCLA was putting all 3 LBs and the 2 safeties in the box along with the 4 linemen. You can rarely see the safeties in the TV screen before a play, I could see them just about every play in the 2nd half.
Unless you’re a corn-fed Oaklahoma team playing a crummy undersided team like Baylor, no one is going to be able to establish a power inside running game against that. Heck, even when the teams are as unbalanced as they were in the above example it’ll be difficult.
UCLA was just DARING Cal to throw the ball. I was a bit sympathetic last week against OSU that Cal didn’t take OSU up on the same offer because Riley was starting his first game and the ground game was inexplicably still somewhat productive despite them loading the box. This week however with Longshore back and the ineffectiveness of the Bear’s running game, there is just no excuse for the play-calling in the 2nd half. Here are the 1st down plays of the Bears last 3 possessions before the fateful interception:
- J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
- J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 7 yard gain
- J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 4 yard gain
And just in case anyone gets the wrong idea about that 7 yard gain on the middle possesion of the 3, Cal was stuffed on 2nd down and then got held short on a Longshore to Best screen play on 3rd down for a 3 and out.
To further the point, let’s compare two drives: The first of these 3 fateful drives and the preceeding drive, Cal’s last touchdown. First the bad drive:
- 1st-10, Cal20 0:24 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
- 2nd-8, Cal22 15:00 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 13 yard gain
- 1st-10, Cal35 14:45 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
- 2nd-8, Cal37 14:05 Cal committed 10 yard penalty
- 2nd-18, Cal27 13:59 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for no gain
- 3rd-18, Cal27 12:57 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 8 yard gain
And note that the last rush for 8 yards was on 3rd and EIGHTEEN!?!. So to recap, 4 completely ineffective rushes (sorry, 8 yards on 3rd and 18 isn’t effective) and 1 13 yard rush that I only believe happened because the box score insists on it. Now, let’s move on to that touchdown drive that preceeded it:
- 1st-10, Cal33 6:25 N. Longshore passed to L. Hawkins to the left for 11 yard gain
- 1st-10, Cal44 6:05 Cal committed 10 yard penalty
- 1st-20, Cal34 5:40 UCLA committed 15 yard penalty
- 1st-10, Cal49 5:30 N. Longshore incomplete pass to the right
- 2nd-10, Cal49 5:24 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
- 3rd-8, UCLA49 4:45 N. Longshore passed to D. Jackson to the right for 14 yard gain
- 1st-10, UCLA35 4:10 N. Longshore passed to L. Cunningham to the right for 16 yard gain
- 1st-10, UCLA19 3:45 N. Longshore passed to J. Forsett down the middle for 15 yard gain
- 1st-4, UCLA4 3:25 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
- 2nd-2, UCLA2 2:50 J. Forsett rushed up the middle for no gain
- 3rd-2, UCLA2 2:15 N. Longshore passed to D. Jackson to the right for 2 yard touchdown.
On this drive Cal passed 6 times, 5 of them for completions, and not a single completion was less than 10 yards sans the TD pass because the ball was at the 2 yard line. On the same drive, the Bears had 3 rushes for a grand total of 4 yards. I don’t know how much more clear I can make it just how much UCLA was geared to stop the run. They were RIDICULOUSLY DARING the Bears to throw the ball and when the Bears did it they marched down the field with amazingly surprising ease.
The Bears should have won this one in a walk… but our coaches insisted otherwise, not because they were conservative, but because they were stubborn.
Unbelievable. Tragic. Disgusting.
October 21st, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I agree wholeheartedly with your definition of “conservative” and your description of Tedford’s commitment to the run as “stubborn”. Spot on. Usually this stubbornness is a good thing, but obviously not yesterday in the second half.
Rather than disgusted, I find myself bewildered. Is Tedford really so stubborn as to be delusional about the Bears chances of succeeding with the run yesterday in the fourth quarter? Was Longshore’s ankle so bad that Coach simply lost faith in his passer? If so, then why not bring in Riley; he certainly played well enough against OSU to get the nod over a gimpy Nate? Finally, how much responsibility for the play calling falls on Longshore, too? Doesn’t he have at least the limited option of changing the play call at the line of scrimmage–including from a run to a pass–based on what he sees as he drops behind center?
October 21st, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Ken,
I won’t lie, I was appalled that Tedford deviated from his traditional run it up the gut three times from 1st and goal inside the five game plan with a smallish finesse runner like Justin Forsett.
This game plan has worked for us on so many occasions… Arizona, Oregon State… for him to try this in a game that really matters is ridiculous. Good thing that interception touchdown to DeSean Jackson worked…
Why don’t we just call it a season, and work on developing a good Run & Shoot offense molded for Riley’s incredible scrambling skills right now?
cheers,
me
October 21st, 2007 at 6:14 pm
[…] from EMFMV: “UCLA debacle 1 of 5: I’m disgusted” There is no excuse for the Bears losing to […]
October 22nd, 2007 at 6:36 am
It wasn’t poor play calling. just poor execution! Plain and simple! Football is made up of blocking and tackling. CAL did neither on Saturday!
October 22nd, 2007 at 11:56 am
I also wondered about Longshore’s part in the ultimate playcalling, CAPete, but I have to think that there would be NO WAY Tedford would have allowed him to conitnue on with calls like that. If it was Longshore making all these adjustment calls, Tedford surley would have stepped in LONG BEFORE and put stop to it.
This has to fall on Tedford. He’s makes the game plan, the adjustments and calls the plays. He got outcoached by Karl Dorrell. That’s just plain embarrassing!
And the total ineptness as defense falls on Bob Gregory. There was nothing in the way of blocking or tackling. ZERO.
I, too, am more bewildered than anything else. We just didn’t look anything like the Bears…and we lost a game we had NO BUSINESS losing. Just incredible.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I think you can definitely say the execution wasn’t there, but c’mon, let’s not candy coat the fact that in the last 2 games, Tedford has just not exhibited any signs that he is the offensive mastermind all the analysts make him out to be.
I mean, how can you not punch it in against OSU when you have like 1st and Goal from the 2?!? Yeah you can argue execution, but if it doesn’t work like 2 times, don’t you try something different on 3rd down? And especially on 4th down when you’re giving up a field goal opportunity (that if we made would have left us tied and going down the field on the last series for the win instead), shouldn’t you at least try and fake out the defense?
As for the UCLA game, stubborn is right. How do you run it up the gut twice, then ask Longshore to throw an out? Have DeSean give the DB a double move then throw him one down the field? At least then you have less of a chance for the pick-6. Besides all the UCLA DB’s were so frustrated and couldn’t guard him, we totally had them on their heels and gave that away.
I’m used to CAL not being a good team, but it’s hard when your so close and the coaches just aren’t making the right calls and are getting out coached. I hope that’s not the case this Saturday.
October 22nd, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Longshore can’t run even when healthy, with the ankle spain he can’t run at all. That’s a whole dimension that UCLA didn’t have to worry about. That frees up the linebackers to blitz or double cover a receiver.
What happend to DS on punt returns? He let a lot just bounce. Ones that earlier in the season he would have handled he backed off and let them roll on by him. He’s starting to look for the sidelines instead of turning into the field for a few extra yards. Usually you see this in the bowl game like a couple of CAL players did against Texas Tech a few years ago. I think he’s starting to see the $$$ that the NFL offers, and now that he is out of the Heisman race he just doesn’t want to get hurt.